494
submitted 1 year ago by NightOwl@lemm.ee to c/canada@lemmy.ca
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Melkath@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago

You have the knowledge in the back of your mind. The warnings make you have it in active thought.

What kind of manipulative power trip behavior control bullshit logic is this?

Do you truly believe consumers usually/always make rational and reasonable decisions, that don’t go against their own interests?

Who the fuck cares? I decide how I live my life. If you want to wear bubble wrap and consume nothing but distilled water and unflavored soy bean paste so you can totally live forever and never need medical treatment, have at.

I'd rather live.

[-] SkyeStarfall@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 year ago

How would warnings stop you from that? It's informative text, it can't hurt you. Not any more than the alcohol itself.

[-] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 year ago

sounds like regulatory capture to me: increase the bar to establish a brand so that only established brands dominate the market place. laws are bad and there should only be fewer of them.

[-] SkyeStarfall@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 year ago

....how does that apply to labels

[-] Angry_Maple@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It can be really easy to change what's on a label, to be honest. Just set everything up with some time buffer, and there won't be any disruptions.

I'll never understand why more information is bad. I'm sure some people with allergies would love to easily know what's in booze before they buy/drink it.

[-] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 year ago

if I only needed to scrawl an abv and my signature on my wine before, and now I need a printed label, my cost increases.

[-] Melkath@kbin.social 0 points 1 year ago

I would rather my government spend my tax dollars solving real problems, not creating hoops for companies to jump through so people can ignore them (which is your narrative, in reality, it is intended to stagmatize the product and the people who consume the product and try to shame them into stopping).

[-] yetAnotherUser@feddit.de 2 points 1 year ago

That's false, these warnings are successful ib preventing people from consuming the drug and therefore directly decreasing healthcare costs for society.

In fact, some countries pursue it even further, mandating bland packaging for cigarettes. This is especially effective in preventing minors from smoking.

[-] Melkath@kbin.social -2 points 1 year ago

Sounds like our are adept "ib" being a giant fascist tool who relishes the idea of getting some degenerates to stop drinking an smoking. Like savages.

[-] yetAnotherUser@feddit.de 2 points 1 year ago

What? I barely understand what you're saying.

Regulating industries is not banning them. And industries profiting from addictions should be especially regulated to prevent and combat said addictions. Is banning gambling ads targeted at children also fascist?

this post was submitted on 15 Aug 2023
494 points (95.6% liked)

Canada

7230 readers
389 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Universities


💵 Finance / Shopping


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social and Culture


Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:

https://lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS